As a former staff developer, long time community and code contributor and Sangoma shareholder the over all direction and quality of things has got me wondering why people don’t revolt. Understand they can’t seem to invest in open source why the base salaries between the top execs is over $1.2 Million dollars, plus other benefits and perks. They are continuously laying people off and have operated at a net loss for years. The mission here seems to be for these 3 to milk as much money out of the company as possible for as long as possible. This all without answering to their customers, shareholders or employees. What sad is some employee will kill this post pretty quick and it will probably be one of the folks struggling to take care of people or put food on their table. But hey at least the execs are making money.
Isn’t that exactly how it should be? ask M, T or B, (don’t ask G)!
It’s all open source, fork it and start over.
Generally, it seems like this is the current state of capitalism in North America. We’re seeing self-enrichment amongst a very, very few at the expense of many. Hospital groups in the US are getting bought by “venture capitalists” (the modern term for corporate raiders), who sell off assets like real estate, take out ownership profits, and leave bankrupt husks. Red Lobster is another example.
The people running the show seen to care more about their own short-term interest than they do the long term viability of the entity they are running.
I like to keep things transparent. Let’s not hide…
Firing a bunch of Open source people and hiring one guy with a fancy title isn’t the way…
This is NOT off topic because it directly deals with the project and livelihoods of all involved. This is ALL public information filed because Sangoma is a PUBLIC company with shareholders like me who they have to disclose to. Those disclosures show a trend.
But bigger than base salaries…
And all the parachutes made of gold
LET’S BE REAL HERE! Hundreds of open source people and advocates have been laid off and they hired a yes man with a title that is here to silence anyone who speaks poorly of the mismanagement. Let’s evaluate why people look to me. Before I was am employee, when I was an employee and currently I put the community first. The community came before management, bean counters and even the share holders. When asked what they could do to make me stay the answer was nothing. Because at the end of the day I am more useful to the community when I don’t have to worry about which manager I piss off. The position you got was a failed attempt to lure back one of us (the people who created and built FreePBX) and I hope you got the 6 figures they were offering to us. Unfortunately nobody who knows the project well enough to properly do that job will accept a salary from Sangoma or gamble that the position will still exist in 12 months. If somehow I can’t post here because you feel the need to follow through on your threats I will make more noise than you have ever seen. There is a reason I was allowed to advocate for the community within the company like nobody else and I am happy to show the world.
I temporarily suspended @jfinstrom for the rest of 2024.
Below are some links to related portions of the Code of Conduct that @jfinstrom violated in this current topic but the recent pattern of behaviour was not isolated to this incident:
“they hired a yes man” - ad hominem attack
“which manager I piss off” - keep it clean
“I will make more noise than you have ever seen” - respect each other
Before arriving at this point, I reviewed some discourse moderation guidance by Jon Ericson and agree with him on many points, including the suggestion to PM (as the record above shows), as well as sharing the sentiment:
“I don’t like to give up on people.”
And you gave him those examples of where he was in violation in the DM you sent him? What James posted here for the DM has no details on what he was doing wrong just a threat.
The examples you gave seem like a real stretch to me and if you never gave him a warning with showing examples but just banned him because he upset someone at Sangoma is not a good sign for the direction of this project and community.
And yes full disclosure I work with James and have been friends with him since 2008. Enjoy your new found power Sir. Remember with great power comes great responsibility.
Did anyone actually complain? The PM posted looks more of a complaint regarding not stating that Sangoma employees have made git commits…
The FUD calling though is pretty hilarious as I don’t remember Jim Machi getting suspended for all the FUD he did.
Not sure how the Canadian regulators will look at banning a shareholder for posting data from a PUBLIC filing. I guess we’ll find out soon enough.
Actually that brings up a good point. Taking action on a shareholder for voicing his opinion. It is not just the TSX. Sangoma is Nasdaq listed. Let’s all rally to the 2 public exchanges about the censorship of shareholders in a company public forum, as he was banned for speaking up as a shareholder on his concerns of the company and the future of FreePBX that they own.
Another great example of Sangoma does not care about the community or the project and only profits. After Scott Holtzman unexpectedly passed away last month I sent text messages to numerous VP and C level people at Sangoma asking them to please help support Scott’s wife Elaine with the Go Fund Me that was setup in his honor. To this day Sangoma Corporate have given nothing to Elaine, his wife. When I was COO at Sangoma and CEO at Schmooze prior to Sangoma buying FreePBX when someone passed away that was instrumental in our community or the company I always made a sizable donation in support of their family. It was the least we could do.
Scott worked at Sangoma for 6-7 years as an employee and spent 8 plus years before that helping support FreePBX on his own time and was one of the most active community contributors in the forums. It is quite the shame that we have gotten to the point where it feels nobody at Sangoma cares about the project at a human level that matters anymore.
What do you say to that @penguinpbx ?
The two month ban of James raises serious questions about Sangoma’s approach to managing criticism within the FreePBX community. Having worked closely with both FreePBX and Asterisk, I’ve seen firsthand how essential it is for open-source projects to foster communities that welcome—even encourage—challenging viewpoints. I have been there, done that, and still have the trade show tshirts…Open-source thrives when contributors, shareholders, and users can raise issues without fear of heavy-handed responses. And to be fair, if you review my post here, I’m certain you can probably dig up a few heavy handed responses, I can be that guy too. However as once being the person responsible for the community as well as monetization of the platform itself I speak from some direct experience.
When a long-time community member and Sangoma shareholder like James voices concerns, the best response isn’t to silence but to engage openly. According to the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and Discourse’s moderation guidelines, handling dissent constructively is key to healthy community management. Here’s what a more open and constructive approach could look like:
-
Address Financial Priorities Directly: Instead of banning critics, Sangoma could offer transparency about executive compensation, community support, recent staff lay offs and how resources are allocated to FreePBX. Addressing these financial concerns openly would reassure contributors and shareholders, showing that Sangoma values both transparency and trust. In a previous life I was on that executive team, and can vouch for the amount of work it was to have 16 straight quarters of growth. FreePBX may not be as large of a percentage of the revenue pie as it once was, and priorities shifted, but those investing in the ecosystem should have a clearly communicated path for the project, something that I would assume fall under @penguinpbx’s advocacy roles, or maybe fall under @mwhite who assumed part of my prior role after I departed Sangoma five years ago.
-
Engage in Dialogue, Not Censorship: Discourse’s guidelines advise moderators to engage with active users gradually, beginning with private discussions and addressing concerns with clarity before taking more severe action. Rather than reacting emotionally to criticism—even if it feels personal—moderators are encouraged to see dissent as an opportunity for dialogue and understanding. Here, the private conversation with James might have defused the situation without the need for a public suspension, but in the same breath, you get hope to see you at Astricon and bygones be bygones and, bty you are banned, Just because someone’s feelings might get hurt doesn’t mean it’s time for the “nuclear option.” Effective moderation builds understanding and respect, even in challenging discussions.
-
Demonstrate Tangible Commitment to FreePBX: Sangoma could highlight ongoing efforts to support FreePBX—such as GitHub contributions, development roadmaps, and specific investments in open-source initiatives. Discourse’s moderation philosophy also recommends that when action is taken, it should be clearly explained to the community. Being transparent about community support efforts and explaining decisions strengthens credibility and shows Sangoma’s commitment to FreePBX’s future. To many the code of conduct references seem like a stretch. If the reason for a ban has to be explained in that detail it probably shouldn’t have happened. I banned plenty of users here during my tenure, and every time it would be apparently clear as to why the ban happened.
-
Foster Constructive Criticism: Both FSF and Discourse guidelines emphasize that dissenting voices often bring valuable insights. Instead of treating criticism as disruptive, moderators are encouraged to welcome it as a way to build a stronger, more inclusive community. Inviting critical perspectives demonstrates Sangoma’s commitment to collaboration and openness, core principles of the open-source ethos. Even when I put in my sales hat, upset customers are an opportunity to improve, either your product or performance.
In open-source communities, trust is built on transparency, respectful engagement, and collaboration. Moderation shouldn’t be used to defend a corporate image—it should foster an environment where every voice can contribute. Sangoma has a real opportunity here to reaffirm its commitment to FreePBX by inviting open dialogue, addressing valid concerns head-on, and embracing constructive criticism. This approach would honor the spirit of open source and strengthen the community’s trust in Sangoma’s stewardship of FreePBX.
This is an unbelievable response from Sangoma.
A 2 month ban?
I think the longest ban I did on an ACTIVE community member was 2 weeks or something on @dicko and that outranged the community (and dicko) at that time.
Keep towing that company line @penguinpbx
I don’t think you, @penguinpbx, have a leg to stand on morally here.
First of all, I’m proud to be a former Sangoma employee and part of FreePBX.
free community free thoughts free speech here is FreePBX platform not your father’s shop. Mr @penguinpbx
#FreeJames
@chrisd I think you nailed the tagline here. #FreeJames
@apiban what a dead on blog here. I suggest everyone please read this. Fred has a long history in Open Source Projects of Asterisk, Kamilo and a speaker at Astricon for more years than I can count. Sangoma Continues to Disappoint
What has become of open discourse? If people in this forum cannot openly discuss and agree or disagree on a position without kicking out the one with a conflicting opinion, then open source is dead.
Few will disagree that FreePBX is somewhat less than it was five years ago. The constant outflow of knowledgeable employees is telling. I feel sorry for remaining employees assigned to FreePBX as they have limited resources to attempt to keep the product alive. The lack of QA to get FreePBX-17 out the door left the testing process largely on the community for issue detection. FreePBX has remained behind with many outdated libraries, PHP versions, etc., remaining in the product even as FreePBX-17 is released.
Mr. Finstrom brought forth valid issues and you @penguinpbx kicked him out. If Sangoma wants to sunset FreePBX, be honest about it and announce the date of the funeral. Otherwise, you need to show more respect for community members and former employees.
C’mon, FreePBX? I thought there was another VOIP systems company that was known for this type of thing: FYI - 3CX kicked me off. Alternatives? | The VoIP-info Forum
There’s plenty of evidence of the other guys suppressing any form of criticism by banning from forums or cancelling access. Is this the message you want to communicate?
Do the right thing. Engage in thoughtful dialog with your critics. You might be surprised to find that those who appear to be critical actually care about your product. Treat them with dignity and respect and they will be your best advocates.